Hoi, The main thing to remember is that all these lexemes are in fact the labels we currently hold. The relatisation that this is true is key. Thanks, Gerard
On 13 September 2016 at 18:30, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de wrote:
Am 13.09.2016 um 17:16 schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi, The database design for OmegaWiki had a distinction between the concept
and all
the derivatives for them.
Wikidata will have Lexemes and their Forms and Senses.
So bumblebee is more complex than just "instance of" noun. It is an
English
noun. "Hommel" is connected as a Dutch noun for the same concept and
"hommels"
is the Dutch plural...
Wikidata would have a Lexeme for "bumblebee" (english noun) and one for "Hommel" (dutch noun). Both would have a sense that would describe them as a flying insect (and perhaps other word senses, such as Q1626135, a creater on the moon). The senses that refer to the flying insect would be considered translations of each other, and both senses would refer to the same concept.
So "bumblebee" (insect) is a translation of "Hommel" (insect), and both refer to the genus Bombus (Q25407). "Hommel" (creater) would share the morphology of "Hommel" (insect), as it has the same forms (I assume), but it won't share the translations.
Having lexeme-specific word-senses avoids the loss of connotation and nuance that you get when you force words of different languages on a shared meaning. The effect of referring to the same concept can still be achieved via the reference to a concept (item).
-- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer
Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata